Create an __NOINDEX__ equivalent to prevent indexing by internal search engine
Closed, ResolvedPublic


Author: stigmj

Shouldn't Lucene-search also respect the NOINDEX tag? If not, there should exist another magic word to stop certain pages from being indexed and searchable. Alternatively a "robots.txt" file (maybe a better solution to be able to restrict this exclusion-feature to admins only) in the MediaWiki-namespace should be consulted.

Version: unspecified
Severity: enhancement

bzimport added a project: MediaWiki-Search.Via ConduitNov 21 2014, 11:06 PM
bzimport added a subscriber: Unknown Object (MLST).
bzimport set Reference to bz24169.
bzimport created this task.Via LegacyJun 28 2010, 9:13 PM
bzimport added a comment.Via ConduitDec 4 2010, 12:36 PM

stigmj wrote:


He7d3r added a comment.Via ConduitMar 26 2011, 12:28 AM


Bawolff added a comment.Via ConduitMar 26 2011, 12:33 AM

NOINDEX is primarily to stop google et al. from finding it. If this was to be implemented, I would say it should have a different magic word (or at the very least a config option).

Changing component to search, because if this was to be implemented, it should prevent indexing on any of mediawiki's internal search backends, not just lucene. (not 100% sure compoenent change is right. please revert if not)

bzimport added a comment.Via ConduitMar 26 2011, 12:34 AM

rainman wrote:

What is a rationale for a change like this? Why should we have content that cannot be found in any way except from direct link?

bzimport added a comment.Via ConduitMar 26 2011, 7:33 AM

stigmj wrote:

Well, one use-case would be in situations like this:
where we have a large collection of pages with potential searchwords and we don't want to create a new ns...

bzimport added a comment.Via ConduitMar 17 2012, 10:48 AM

rd232 wrote:

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 22251 ***

Bachsau added a comment.Via ConduitApr 14 2012, 12:51 PM

I wouldn't want a new magic word. May a config option, if NOINDEX should also apply to internal search would do.

Add Comment